{"paper_id":"09cfcb0a-d59a-4723-ae3a-96f9bb342eab","body_text":"Examining the Role of Poultry Value Chain Finance in Advancing Environmental Sustainability in Zimbabwe: A Qualitative Approach | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Examining the Role of Poultry Value Chain Finance in Advancing Environmental Sustainability in Zimbabwe: A Qualitative Approach Pilot Ngwenya, Gift Mugano This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7311753/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract As environmental concerns grow in agri-food systems, this study investigates how Poultry Value Chain Finance (VCF) supports environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe. It examines stakeholder perceptions of VCF's role in promoting sustainable poultry farming practices. Using a qualitative approach, nine participants- including broiler and layer farmers, representatives from public institutions, and poultry association officials- were purposively selected and interviewed through semi-structured protocols. Thematic analysis identified key patterns and differing views on VCF’s environmental effects. Results show VCF can promote sustainable practices like waste management and renewable energy use, but these benefits depend on funding arrangements, training, and regulatory support. Most stakeholders see VCF as mainly production-focused, with limited emphasis on environmental outcomes unless linked to specific loan conditions or external incentives. The findings have practical and policy implications, emphasising the importance of incorporating environmental criteria and training into poultry financing. This study makes two major contributions: creating a conceptual framework connecting VCF, mediators, moderators, and sustainability results, and expanding the discourse on value chain finance by applying Institutional Theory to address sustainability gaps in the poultry sector. Agricultural Economics and Policy Environmental Economics Poultry value chain finance Environmental sustainability Qualitative research Zimbabwe Institutional theory Sustainable farming Figures Figure 1 Introduction Zimbabwe’s agriculture sector is pivotal to its economic development, yet it stands at a crossroads as sustainability challenges intensify (Gundu-Jakarasi & Nhidza, 2021; Mafongoya et al., 2019 ). Among the pressing concerns is how to align agricultural growth with environmentally responsible practices. The poultry sector, in this context, plays a crucial role in food security, income generation, and employment, especially for small- to medium-scale enterprises (Guèye, 2003 ; Melesse, 2014 ). Most poultry production in Zimbabwe is dominated by informal and backyard farming systems, where producers often lack formal certification and oversight (Scoones, 2023 ). Unregulated poultry farming can severely impact the environment through pollution of water, soil, and air due to improper waste management and emissions of harmful gases and particulates (Mitroi et al., 2021 ). Additionally, the expansion of poultry operations often leads to habitat destruction and biodiversity loss through deforestation and land conversion (Scanes, 2017 ). According to Abah et al. ( 2019 ) the poultry sector generates substantial quantities of both solid waste and wastewater, which, if not properly managed, can pose serious risks to the environment and human health by contaminating soil and groundwater and facilitating the spread of diseases. This informality further contributes to unsustainable practices, including the unsafe disposal of poultry waste alongside municipal solid waste, thereby increasing the risk of soil and water pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and public health hazards (Centner, 2010 ; Gbotosho & Burt, 2013 ; Jia & Anthony, 2009 ; Seidavi et al., 2019 ). These realities position the poultry sector as a high-impact area for policy and financial intervention aimed at promoting environmental sustainability. In response to such challenges, Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) has emerged as a mechanism not only to enhance production and profitability but also to support environmentally sustainable farming practices (Bukachi et al., 2023 ). This assertion is in line with Gabriel and Ifenyinwa ( 2019 )’s findings, who established that there is a positive and strong relationship between the agriculture value chain in the poultry sector and waste management. When properly structured, PVCF can provide capital that is conditional on the adoption of eco-friendly technologies, such as solar-powered heating systems, biogas digesters, and waste recycling infrastructure (U. K. Agricultural Finance, 2024 ). However, the extent to which such financial tools contribute to environmental sustainability remains unclear in Zimbabwe, where financing models are often geared toward production maximisation rather than ecological responsibility. Despite increasing academic attention to value chain finance, few studies, especially qualitative ones, have examined how it shapes environmental behaviour and investment decisions within the poultry industry. Environmental sustainability refers to the responsible interaction with the environment to meet the needs of the current generation without compromising the needs of future generations (Boroushaki et al., 2021 ). The three pillars of sustainability are environmental, economic, and social, and these aim to reduce pollution and protect ecosystems, promote long-term economic growth aligned with environmental goals, and ensure social equity and well-being (Al-Aomar, 2019 ; Boroushaki et al., 2021 ). In agricultural systems, and more specifically in poultry farming, it encompasses practices that reduce environmental degradation, such as proper waste management, efficient energy use, water conservation, and the reduction of emissions. In Zimbabwe, environmental sustainability is urgently needed due to fragile ecosystems, erratic rainfall, and poor waste infrastructure (Chikozho, 2010 ; Makuvaro et al., 2018 ; Toriro, 2024 ). The growth in poultry farming has caused a significant rise in the amount of waste generated, which commonly includes hatchery by-products, deceased birds, rejected carcasses, and manure (Akporube et al., 2023 ). Poultry farmers often dispose of chicken litter and carcasses with municipal waste or directly into the environment, posing risks to water bodies, soil health, and air quality. Promoting sustainable practices in poultry production is therefore crucial to meeting Sustainable Development Goal 12, which emphasises efficient use of resources and environmentally sound waste management. Value chain activities encompass the entire process of bringing a product from its initial conception to the final consumer, including production, marketing, and distribution (Rodrigues et al., 2023 ). It includes formal loans, trade credit, grants, and other financial arrangements that support production, marketing, and value addition. Ideally, PVCF should incentivize not just productivity but also ecological sustainability by integrating conditionalities that promote cleaner technologies, improved animal welfare, and safer disposal systems. In Zimbabwe, however, PVCF is largely underdeveloped and skewed toward increasing output, with limited attention to environmental externalities. Understanding the relationship between PVCF and sustainability requires a deep dive into how financing decisions are made, who sets the terms, and how environmental factors are weighed or ignored by lenders and borrowers alike. This study aims to address this knowledge gap by answering the research question: How does poultry value chain finance affect environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe? Through a qualitative research approach grounded in institutional theory, the study explores stakeholder perceptions from across the poultry value chain, including farmers, public institutions, and farmer associations. The focus on environmental sustainability directly aligns with SDG 12, which calls for reducing waste generation and managing natural resources efficiently. By illuminating the contextual, institutional, and behavioural factors that mediate the effectiveness of PVCF in advancing sustainability, the study provides an evidence base for rethinking how financing instruments can be designed to simultaneously achieve productivity and ecological outcomes. Moreover, this inquiry contributes to an underexplored domain within sustainable development finance literature by emphasizing the micro-level realities of small-scale poultry farmers, who often operate outside regulatory frameworks yet collectively exert significant pressure on local ecosystems. The study also advances scholarship by introducing a conceptual framework that maps out the mediating and moderating variables linking PVCF to environmental sustainability, while applying institutional theory to explain the enabling or constraining role of formal rules and informal norms in shaping financial and ecological behaviour. The rest of this paper is organised as follows: it begins with the theoretical framework based on institutional theory, followed by the research methodology detailing the qualitative design and sampling process. The paper then presents the findings and interprets them within the context of existing literature. It concludes with limitations, practical recommendations, and suggestions for future research, particularly in the field of sustainable financing for small-scale agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa. Theoretical Framework This study adopts Institutional Theory as the lens to examine how Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) influences environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe. Institutional theory posits that actors' behaviour is shaped by formal rules (regulations, policies) and informal norms (social expectations, cultural practices) within a given institutional environment. In the context of PVCF, this theory helps explain how environmental sustainability is either encouraged or neglected based on the regulatory and normative frameworks governing finance and farming practices. For instance, if financial institutions do not embed environmental criteria into loan agreements, farmers may prioritise output over sustainability. Conversely, where environmental conditionalities are enforced, farmers may adopt eco-friendly practices to access finance. The theory also accounts for isomorphism, where smaller actors mimic the practices of more established ones, often reinforcing unsustainable norms. By applying Institutional Theory, the study identifies how the absence of strong environmental institutions and weak enforcement of green financing policies limits PVCF’s capacity to drive sustainable outcomes in the poultry sector. Methodology Research Design and Philosophy A qualitative, interpretivist approach was adopted to gain an in-depth understanding of stakeholders' perceptions and lived experiences regarding Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) and its influence on environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe. This design was chosen for its ability to explore complex, real-world phenomena and uncover nuanced, context-specific insights that cannot be captured through quantitative methods alone (Gillan et al., 2014 ). Grounded in the interpretivist paradigm, the study assumes that reality is socially constructed and subjective, with multiple perspectives shaped by personal, institutional, and environmental contexts (Greiffenhagen & Sharrock, 2008 ). This stance allows for a rich exploration of how farmers, institutions, and associations experience and interpret the environmental implications of PVCF. Rather than testing hypotheses, the study sought to generate meaning from participants’ narratives, capturing the diversity of views shaped by socio-economic and regulatory environments. Through this lens, the research reveals how environmental sustainability is conceptualised, practised, or neglected across various nodes of the poultry value chain. Sampling and Participants This study employed a non-probability purposive sampling technique to select nine participants with direct and relevant experience in the poultry value chain in Zimbabwe. The participants included broiler and layer poultry farmers, public institution representatives responsible for agricultural and environmental regulation, and officials from poultry associations and farmer unions. Purposive sampling was chosen to ensure rich, contextually grounded insights from individuals with first-hand knowledge of poultry production and financing systems. Participants were recruited through site visits, email communication, or outreach via WhatsApp, ensuring accessibility and engagement across different channels. Data Collection Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with all nine participants, using a flexible interview guide aligned with the study’s objectives and central research question. The interviews explored key themes such as access to VCF, its application, environmental management practices, awareness of sustainability, and the role of institutional support. Interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes and were conducted either face-to-face, telephonically, or electronically via Microsoft Teams or Google Meet, depending on participant preference and availability. All questions were open-ended to allow participants to express their experiences freely and deeply. The interviews were audio-recorded with consent and transcribed verbatim for analysis. Data Analysis Thematic analysis, guided by Braun and Clarke’s procedures, was used to analyse the interview transcripts. Initial codes were generated and later organised into key themes and sub-themes. The analysis focused on identifying patterns, contrasts, and narratives specific to each stakeholder group. To ensure data quality, triangulation was applied using multiple sources, including interview notes, audio recordings, and field observations. Results Results Section This section presents the qualitative findings on the perceived role of Poultry Value Chain Finance (VCF) in promoting environmental sustainability among various stakeholders in Zimbabwe's poultry sector. Insights were derived from semi-structured interviews with farmers, public officials, and union representatives. Two major themes emerged: ( 1) VCF’s Contribution to Long-Lasting and Environmentally Sustainable Farming Practices and (2) Likelihood of Financed Farmers Adopting Better Environmental Practices. Theme 1: VCF’s Contribution to Long-Lasting and Environmentally Sustainable Farming Practices Stakeholder perceptions of VCF’s role in fostering environmentally sustainable practices were diverse and conditional. Sub-theme 1.1: VCF as Enabler, but Not Guarantee of Environmental Practices Many respondents viewed finance as a potential enabler for environmentally friendly practices if managed properly. A public sector respondent noted: “If managed properly it can.” (Participant 1) Similarly, another participant offered a brief but affirmative view: “Yes.” (Participant 2) These responses imply general optimism but lack specificity, suggesting that VCF’s environmental impact depends heavily on how it is structured and applied. Sub-theme 1.2: Profit Orientation vs. Environmental Commitment A recurring concern was that profitability often overshadows environmental considerations in poultry farming. A poultry manager explained: “Investment in poultry farming is highly profitable but risky because of unpredictable conditions which can adversely affect the business. E.g., diseases, outbreaks, and poor weather conditions.” (Participant 3) This underscores the sector's vulnerability and the risk that environmental practices may be deprioritized in pursuit of short-term survival and productivity. Sub-theme 1.3: Gaps in Waste Management and Overuse of Chemicals Some participants raised environmental red flags concerning current practices: “Not as such, there is no recycling happening in terms of the disposal of chicken feathers. There is too much chemical use and no proper management of the disposal of the chemical containers.” (Participant 4) This response signals critical issues in waste handling, pointing to missed opportunities for value creation through recycling or safer disposal methods. Sub-theme 1.4: VCF Focused on Production, Not Pollution Control There was agreement that financing prioritizes output over sustainability. One participant stressed: “Not necessarily, because financing is normally advanced for production purposes rather than for other things such as pollution management.” (Participant 5) This aligns with the concern that VCF, as currently designed, lacks a direct environmental sustainability component. Theme 2: Likelihood of Financed Farmers Adopting Better Environmental Practices The potential for VCF to stimulate environmentally responsible behaviour among farmers was generally acknowledged but seen as dependent on several factors. Sub-theme 2.1: Financing as Empowerment Some participants argued that access to finance could empower farmers to improve their environmental practices. One participant expressed this view: “Yes, they can use the money to improve their way of operation.” (Participant 7) Similarly, another participant noted: “Yes.” (Participant 8) This suggests that financial support can indirectly improve sustainability if it is directed toward relevant improvements. Sub-theme 2.2: Training and Awareness as Critical Enablers Others stressed that money alone is insufficient. Training and awareness were repeatedly cited as key prerequisites for sustainable change. “No. It is farmers who have the awareness and the training.” (Participant 6) This view highlights the need for integrated capacity building alongside financing schemes. Sub-theme 2.3: Barriers, Costs and Knowledge Gaps Several respondents noted that adoption of environmental practices is often limited by financial and technical constraints: “Yes, but might be limited because these come with more costs and need extra knowledge to be done.” (Participant 9) Sub-theme 2.4: Linking Financing to Good Agricultural Practices. Some participants believed that sustainable practices could be realized only if financing is linked to structured programs. A union official noted: “Only if the financing is linked to good agricultural practices. With the mushrooming of so many smallholders’ farmers, the adoption of environmental practices is very difficult to implement since the farmers have limited income. The farmers do not have much of the environmental practices knowledge as their mind is on production and cutting costs.” (Participant 5) This reflects the reality that backyard and smallholder poultry operations dominant in the sector often lack both the financial margins and the technical expertise to invest in sustainable practices unless explicitly incentivized. The qualitative findings reveal a common understanding that while VCF has the potential to foster environmental sustainability, it is not inherently structured to do so. Financing is largely directed toward productivity, not ecological responsibility. The emphasis placed by stakeholders on training, conditional financing, and awareness-building supports the idea that a more holistic approach is needed one that embeds sustainability requirements in financial mechanisms. These insights support SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, which calls for sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. By aligning poultry VCF with this goal through targeted funding for waste recycling, water reuse, and chemical safety the sector could shift from short-term output orientation to long-term ecological resilience. Discussion of Qualitative Findings The themes that emerged from this study particularly the enabling role of Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) in promoting or inhibiting environmental sustainability closely align with existing literature on sustainable poultry production and Agri finance. The conditional potential of PVCF to support environmentally sound practices mirrors the observations of Rodrigues et al. (2024), who emphasised that while Environmental Management Accounting (EMA) tools can help link financial flows to ecological outcomes, sustainability cannot be assumed as a natural by-product of financing mechanisms. This supports the participants' views that PVCF, as currently structured in Zimbabwe, is primarily focused on increasing productivity rather than embedding pollution control, waste management, or chemical safety. The perception that short-term profitability is prioritized over long-term environmental commitment also echoes concerns raised by (Gržinić et al., 2023), who highlighted that intensive poultry systems exert significant environmental pressures, particularly through the overuse of chemicals and poor disposal practices. The absence of structured recycling or pollution mitigation among the studied farmers reflects broader global challenges in balancing industrial efficiency with environmental stewardship in poultry systems. Moreover, the findings revealed a strong consensus that access to finance alone is insufficient to drive sustainable behaviour unless accompanied by training, awareness, and technical capacity. This view aligns with Shamsuddoha et al. (2022), who demonstrated that reverse logistics and green supply chain improvements in poultry production are more effective when integrated with human capital development. Without capacity-building components, PVCF may inadvertently reinforce unsustainable practices by enabling farmers to scale production without corresponding investments in environmental safeguards. Participants also underscored that environmental sustainability in poultry farming is unlikely to be achieved unless financing is explicitly linked to Good Agricultural Practices (GAP). Gabriel and Ifenyinwa (2019) support this assertion, emphasizing that capital investments need strategic environmental conditions to avoid adverse long-term impacts. This further affirms that finance should be conditional and embedded within broader institutional support structures, including regulatory oversight, to ensure effective alignment with environmental goals. Stakeholder theory offers a useful framework for interpreting these findings. The study involved diverse stakeholder groups: poultry farmers, public officials, and farmer associations each with unique but interdependent interests. The repeated call for training, conditional financing, and support for environmental practices demonstrates the need to balance these stakeholders’ expectations. For example, smallholder farmers prioritize cost efficiency and short-term survival, while public officials emphasize adherence to environmental standards. Integrating these perspectives requires participatory financial design and stakeholder-inclusive policy frameworks, as also advocated by (Rodrigues et al., 2024). Additionally, the study found that PVCF fails to incorporate environmental safeguards as core requirements, a concern also noted in Martinelli et al. (2020), who demonstrated that the eco-efficiency of poultry production remains low in systems where environmental indicators are not systematically tracked. The implication is clear: to promote sustainability, PVCF in Zimbabwe must evolve into a mechanism that incentivises or mandates environmentally responsible behaviour, such as sustainable feed practices, chemical safety, and waste valorisation. The findings also resonate with the call by Shamsuddoha et al. (2022) for reverse logistics and circular economy strategies within poultry value chains. These strategies not only reduce waste but also create new income-generating opportunities, especially when integrated with innovative financing models. Such integrated approaches may help bridge the current gap between production-centric financing and environmental responsibility. To consolidate these findings, a conceptual framework (Figure 1) was developed that illustrates the relationship between the independent variable Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) and the dependent variable Environmental Sustainability. The model integrates critical mediators and moderators derived from the data and literature, including training and awareness, regulatory incentives, sustainability-linked financing conditions, and competing profit-driven goals. These elements serve as either enablers or barriers that mediate and moderate the impact of PVCF on ecological outcomes. This conceptualisation underscores that financial instruments alone are insufficient; their structure, application, and alignment with stakeholder needs and policy contexts determine their sustainability impact. Framed through stakeholder theory, the model highlights that fostering environmental sustainability requires not only financial input but also multi-level stakeholder engagement, institutional coordination, and strategic policy alignment In conclusion, this study confirms that while PVCF has the potential to advance environmental sustainability, it is currently constrained by a narrow operational focus and lack of stakeholder-responsive design. Framed through stakeholder theory, these findings emphasize the need for PVCF schemes that are inclusive, conditional, and integrated with training, regulation, and environmental accountability. Such a redesign would not only improve ecological outcomes but also ensure that the interests of all relevant stakeholders’ farmers, policymakers, financiers, and communities, are equitably considered and served. Limitations The study's scope is limited by its qualitative sample size of nine participants, which, while offering depth, may not represent the broader poultry sector in Zimbabwe. The purposive selection also introduces subjectivity. Additionally, the study focuses solely on perceptions and not on measurable environmental outcomes. Conclusion and Recommendations, and Future Studies Directions Conclusion This study explored the role of poultry value chain finance (VCF) in promoting environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe using a qualitative approach. Findings revealed that while VCF holds potential to support environmentally sound practices, this potential remains largely underutilized. Participants identified gaps in awareness, training, and conditional financing as major barriers to environmental progress. The emphasis of VCF on production over sustainability, coupled with minimal institutional enforcement, limits its transformative impact. Although isolated successes were noted, such as waste management and the adoption of renewable energy by some actors, these were not systemic. The study also highlighted discrepancies between different stakeholders' perceptions, pointing to the need for coordinated, inclusive policy action. Institutional theory helps contextualise these challenges by underscoring the role of formal rules, norms, and capacities in shaping sustainability outcomes. Thus, enhancing institutional frameworks and stakeholder engagement is critical to aligning VCF with environmental goals. Overall, the research contributes to understanding how finance intersects with sustainability in the agri-food sector of developing economies. Recommendations: Financial institutions should embed sustainability criteria in loan agreements. Government and NGOs should invest in environmental training for poultry farmers. Contracts should include budget lines specifically for environmental infrastructure (e.g., waste recycling units). A coordinated framework linking VCF with Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) is needed to address knowledge and practice gaps. Awareness campaigns on the benefits of eco-friendly practices should be scaled up. Technical assistance should be provided to smallholders to overcome knowledge and cost barriers. Monitoring and evaluation systems should track the environmental impact of financed activities Future Research Directions Future studies could expand the sample size and include more geographical regions to enhance representativeness. Mixed-method approaches combining qualitative and quantitative data may offer deeper insights. Longitudinal studies could track the environmental impact of VCF over time. Comparative studies between countries could illuminate best practices. Lastly, future research should assess the effectiveness of policy and institutional reforms in integrating sustainability into Agri-finance. References Abah, H., Nwankwo, A., & Orgem, C. (2019). Waste management practices in selected poultry farms and its effect on the environment and human health in Makurdi, Nigeria. International Journal of Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology , 4 (1). Akporube, K., Kalu, E., Ikpendu, C., & Edward, I. (2023). Poultry waste management in Nigeria: a neglected sector. Journal of Sustainable Veterinary & Allied Sciences , 4 (2). Al-Aomar, R. (2019). Sustainability function deployment: A system-level design-for-sustainability. SysCon 2019 - 13th Annual IEEE International Systems Conference, Proceedings, Boroushaki, M., Ferguson, M., & Olsen, T. L. (2021). Environmental Sustainability Trade-Offs in a Product’s Supply Chain. In Springer Series in Supply Chain Management (Vol. 10, pp. 189–210). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51957-5_9 Bukachi, S. A., Ngutu, M., Omia, D., Musyoka, M. M., Chemuliti, J., & Nyamongo, I. K. (2023). Gender-Linked Dynamics and Sustainable Small Holder Poultry Value Chains in Makueni County, Kenya [Article]. Sustainability (Switzerland) , 15 (14), Article 10907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410907 Centner, T. J. (2010). Discerning liability for contamination by poultry integrators and producers under US federal law [Review]. World's Poultry Science Journal , 66 (1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933910000012 Chikozho, C. (2010). Applied social research and action priorities for adaptation to climate change and rainfall variability in the rainfed agricultural sector of Zimbabwe [Article]. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth , 35 (13-14), 780–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2010.07.006 Gabriel, E. G., & Ifenyinwa, M. S. (2019). Capital investment and the sustainability of agricultural value chain of the poultry industry. International Journal of Management and Entrepreneurship , 1 (1), 193–216. Gbotosho, O., & Burt, P. J. A. (2013). Environmental and health impacts of poultry manure disposal methods: A case study of Lagelu and Egbeda local government areas in Oyo State, Nigeria [Article]. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability , 11 (1), 38–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2012.700100 Gillan, C., Palmer, C., & Bolderston, A. (2014). Qualitative methodologies and analysis. In Research for the Radiation Therapist: From Question to Culture (pp. 127–152). Greiffenhagen, C., & Sharrock, W. (2008). Where do the limits of experience lie? Abandoning the dualism of objectivity and subjectivity [Review]. History of the Human Sciences , 21 (3), 70–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695108093954 Gržinić, G., Piotrowicz-Cieślak, A., Klimkowicz-Pawlas, A., Górny, R. L., Ławniczek-Wałczyk, A., Piechowicz, L., Olkowska, E., Potrykus, M., Tankiewicz, M., & Krupka, M. (2023). Intensive poultry farming: A review of the impact on the environment and human health. Science of the Total Environment , 858 , 160014. Guèye, E. F. (2003). Information dissemination for family poultry research and development [Review]. Livestock Research for Rural Development , 15 (2). Gundu-Jakarasi, V. N., & Nhidza, J. (2021). Climate Change in Zimbabwe’s Vulnerable Communities: A Case Study of Supporting Enhanced Climate Action Project (SECA Project) in Bulilima District. In Sustainable Development Goals Series (Vol. Part F2673, pp. 211–223). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70952-5_14 Jia, L., & Anthony, E. J. (2009). Combustion of poultry-derived fuel in a CFBC. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Fluidized Bed Combustion, Mafongoya, P., Gubba, A., Moodley, V., Chapoto, D., Kisten, L., & Phophi, M. (2019). Climate Change and Rapidly Evolving Pests and Diseases in Southern Africa. In Natural Resource Management and Policy (Vol. 53, pp. 41–57). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11857-0_4 Makuvaro, V., Murewi, C. T. F., Dimes, J., & Chagonda, I. (2018). Are smallholder farmers' perceptions of climate variability and change supported by climate records? A case study of Lower Gweru in Semiarid Central Zimbabwe [Article]. Weather, Climate, and Society , 10 (1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-16-0029.1 Martinelli, G., Vogel, E., Decian, M., Farinha, M. J. U. S., Bernardo, L. V. M., Borges, J. A. R., Gimenes, R. M. T., Garcia, R. G., & Ruviaro, C. F. (2020). Assessing the eco-efficiency of different poultry production systems: An approach using life cycle assessment and economic value added. Sustainable Production and Consumption , 24 , 181–193. Melesse, A. (2014). Significance of scavenging chicken production in the rural community of Africa for enhanced food security [Review]. World's Poultry Science Journal , 70 (3), 593–606. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933914000646 Mitroi, R., Stoian, O., Covaliu, C. I., & Manea, D. (2021). Pollutants resulting from intensive poultry farming activities and their impact on the environment. E3S Web of Conferences, Rodrigues, V. D. V., Wander, A. E., & da Rosa, F. S. (2023). Diagnosis of the Sustainability of a Poultry Value Chain From the Perspective of Environmental Management Accounting. Revista de Gestão - RGSA , 17 (1), e03174. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v17n1-021 Rodrigues, V. D. V., Wander, A. E., & da Silva Rosa, F. (2024). Indicators to analyze environmental performance and eco-controls for a poultry production chain: a methodological proposal based on the EMA system. Environment Systems and Decisions , 44 (1), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-023-09918-x Scanes, C. G. (2017). Human activity and habitat loss: Destruction, fragmentation, and degradation. In Animals and Human Society (pp. 451–482). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805247-1.00026-5 Scoones, I. (2023). The growth of small and medium-scale poultry production in Zimbabwe. Zimbabweland . Seidavi, A. R., Zaker-Esteghamati, H., & Scanes, C. G. (2019). Present and potential impacts of waste from poultry production on the environment [Review]. World's Poultry Science Journal , 75 (1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933918000922 Shamsuddoha, M., Quaddus, M. A., & Woodside, A. G. (2022). Environmental sustainability through designing reverse logistical loops: case research of poultry supply chains using system dynamics. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing , 37 (4), 823–840. Toriro, P. (2024). People-Centred Initiatives as a Response to Infrastructure Collapse in Harare. In Urban Book Series (Vol. Part F1829, pp. 181–199). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45568-1_10 U. K. Agricultural Finance. (2024). Eco-Friendly Practices in Poultry Farming: The Role of Finance. UK Agricultural Finance blog . Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {\"props\":{\"pageProps\":{\"initialData\":{\"identity\":\"rs-7311753\",\"acceptedTermsAndConditions\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":true,\"archivedVersions\":[],\"articleType\":\"Research Article\",\"associatedPublications\":[],\"authors\":[{\"id\":496722818,\"identity\":\"b4fabe23-ca17-4cc5-bd30-67f9e55c8666\",\"order_by\":0,\"name\":\"Pilot Ngwenya\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9390-014X\",\"institution\":\"Durban University of Technology\",\"correspondingAuthor\":true,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Pilot\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Ngwenya\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":496722819,\"identity\":\"8bc98bdf-0858-4e79-a2e3-82d3d132c8ae\",\"order_by\":1,\"name\":\"Gift Mugano\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9392-6173\",\"institution\":\"Durban University of Technology\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Gift\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Mugano\",\"suffix\":\"\"}],\"badges\":[],\"createdAt\":\"2025-08-06 16:26:02\",\"currentVersionCode\":1,\"declarations\":{\"humanSubjects\":true,\"vertebrateSubjects\":false,\"conflictsOfInterestStatement\":false,\"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines\":true,\"humanSubjectConsent\":true,\"humanSubjectClinicalTrial\":false,\"humanSubjectCaseReport\":false,\"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines\":false},\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7311753/v1\",\"doiUrl\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7311753/v1\",\"draftVersion\":[],\"editorialEvents\":[],\"editorialNote\":\"\",\"failedWorkflow\":false,\"files\":[{\"id\":88646410,\"identity\":\"85a419e1-92ed-4507-83ed-1af46656d4b8\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-08-08 16:35:14\",\"extension\":\"jpg\",\"order_by\":1,\"title\":\"Figure 1\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":61501,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eConceptual Framework Informed by Findings and Literature. Source: Author’s design\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"1.jpg\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7311753/v1/5bbd9f0196b9f27904a717c4.jpg\"},{\"id\":88647449,\"identity\":\"039f20f5-7b5b-4dbf-bcad-2613ccecc523\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-08-08 16:43:19\",\"extension\":\"pdf\",\"order_by\":0,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"manuscript-pdf\",\"size\":570142,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"manuscript.pdf\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7311753/v1/3d47709c-984d-44c4-9b71-8e733cd5ec2d.pdf\"}],\"financialInterests\":\"The authors declare no competing interests.\",\"formattedTitle\":\"\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eExamining the Role of Poultry Value Chain Finance in Advancing Environmental Sustainability in Zimbabwe: A Qualitative Approach\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"fulltext\":[{\"header\":\"Introduction\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eZimbabwe’s agriculture sector is pivotal to its economic development, yet it stands at a crossroads as sustainability challenges intensify (Gundu-Jakarasi \\u0026amp; Nhidza, 2021; Mafongoya et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR16\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2019\\u003c/span\\u003e). Among the pressing concerns is how to align agricultural growth with environmentally responsible practices. The poultry sector, in this context, plays a crucial role in food security, income generation, and employment, especially for small- to medium-scale enterprises (Guèye, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR13\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2003\\u003c/span\\u003e; Melesse, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR19\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2014\\u003c/span\\u003e). Most poultry production in Zimbabwe is dominated by informal and backyard farming systems, where producers often lack formal certification and oversight (Scoones, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR24\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2023\\u003c/span\\u003e). Unregulated poultry farming can severely impact the environment through pollution of water, soil, and air due to improper waste management and emissions of harmful gases and particulates (Mitroi et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR20\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2021\\u003c/span\\u003e). Additionally, the expansion of poultry operations often leads to habitat destruction and biodiversity loss through deforestation and land conversion (Scanes, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR23\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2017\\u003c/span\\u003e). According to Abah et al. (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR1\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2019\\u003c/span\\u003e) the poultry sector generates substantial quantities of both solid waste and wastewater, which, if not properly managed, can pose serious risks to the environment and human health by contaminating soil and groundwater and facilitating the spread of diseases. This informality further contributes to unsustainable practices, including the unsafe disposal of poultry waste alongside municipal solid waste, thereby increasing the risk of soil and water pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and public health hazards (Centner, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR6\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2010\\u003c/span\\u003e; Gbotosho \\u0026amp; Burt, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR9\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2013\\u003c/span\\u003e; Jia \\u0026amp; Anthony, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR15\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2009\\u003c/span\\u003e; Seidavi et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR25\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2019\\u003c/span\\u003e). These realities position the poultry sector as a high-impact area for policy and financial intervention aimed at promoting environmental sustainability.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eIn response to such challenges, Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) has emerged as a mechanism not only to enhance production and profitability but also to support environmentally sustainable farming practices (Bukachi et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR5\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2023\\u003c/span\\u003e). This assertion is in line with Gabriel and Ifenyinwa (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR8\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2019\\u003c/span\\u003e)’s findings, who established that there is a positive and strong relationship between the agriculture value chain in the poultry sector and waste management. When properly structured, PVCF can provide capital that is conditional on the adoption of eco-friendly technologies, such as solar-powered heating systems, biogas digesters, and waste recycling infrastructure (U. K. Agricultural Finance, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR28\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2024\\u003c/span\\u003e). However, the extent to which such financial tools contribute to environmental sustainability remains unclear in Zimbabwe, where financing models are often geared toward production maximisation rather than ecological responsibility. Despite increasing academic attention to value chain finance, few studies, especially qualitative ones, have examined how it shapes environmental behaviour and investment decisions within the poultry industry.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eEnvironmental sustainability refers to the responsible interaction with the environment to meet the needs of the current generation without compromising the needs of future generations (Boroushaki et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR4\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2021\\u003c/span\\u003e). The three pillars of sustainability are environmental, economic, and social, and these aim to reduce pollution and protect ecosystems, promote long-term economic growth aligned with environmental goals, and ensure social equity and well-being (Al-Aomar, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR3\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2019\\u003c/span\\u003e; Boroushaki et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR4\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2021\\u003c/span\\u003e). In agricultural systems, and more specifically in poultry farming, it encompasses practices that reduce environmental degradation, such as proper waste management, efficient energy use, water conservation, and the reduction of emissions. In Zimbabwe, environmental sustainability is urgently needed due to fragile ecosystems, erratic rainfall, and poor waste infrastructure (Chikozho, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR7\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2010\\u003c/span\\u003e; Makuvaro et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR17\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2018\\u003c/span\\u003e; Toriro, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR27\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2024\\u003c/span\\u003e). The growth in poultry farming has caused a significant rise in the amount of waste generated, which commonly includes hatchery by-products, deceased birds, rejected carcasses, and manure (Akporube et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR2\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2023\\u003c/span\\u003e). Poultry farmers often dispose of chicken litter and carcasses with municipal waste or directly into the environment, posing risks to water bodies, soil health, and air quality. Promoting sustainable practices in poultry production is therefore crucial to meeting Sustainable Development Goal 12, which emphasises efficient use of resources and environmentally sound waste management.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eValue chain activities encompass the entire process of bringing a product from its initial conception to the final consumer, including production, marketing, and distribution (Rodrigues et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR21\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2023\\u003c/span\\u003e). It includes formal loans, trade credit, grants, and other financial arrangements that support production, marketing, and value addition. Ideally, PVCF should incentivize not just productivity but also ecological sustainability by integrating conditionalities that promote cleaner technologies, improved animal welfare, and safer disposal systems. In Zimbabwe, however, PVCF is largely underdeveloped and skewed toward increasing output, with limited attention to environmental externalities. Understanding the relationship between PVCF and sustainability requires a deep dive into how financing decisions are made, who sets the terms, and how environmental factors are weighed or ignored by lenders and borrowers alike.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThis study aims to address this knowledge gap by answering the research question: \\u003cem\\u003eHow does poultry value chain finance affect environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe?\\u003c/em\\u003e Through a qualitative research approach grounded in institutional theory, the study explores stakeholder perceptions from across the poultry value chain, including farmers, public institutions, and farmer associations. The focus on environmental sustainability directly aligns with SDG 12, which calls for reducing waste generation and managing natural resources efficiently. By illuminating the contextual, institutional, and behavioural factors that mediate the effectiveness of PVCF in advancing sustainability, the study provides an evidence base for rethinking how financing instruments can be designed to simultaneously achieve productivity and ecological outcomes.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eMoreover, this inquiry contributes to an underexplored domain within sustainable development finance literature by emphasizing the micro-level realities of small-scale poultry farmers, who often operate outside regulatory frameworks yet collectively exert significant pressure on local ecosystems. The study also advances scholarship by introducing a conceptual framework that maps out the mediating and moderating variables linking PVCF to environmental sustainability, while applying institutional theory to explain the enabling or constraining role of formal rules and informal norms in shaping financial and ecological behaviour.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe rest of this paper is organised as follows: it begins with the theoretical framework based on institutional theory, followed by the research methodology detailing the qualitative design and sampling process. The paper then presents the findings and interprets them within the context of existing literature. It concludes with limitations, practical recommendations, and suggestions for future research, particularly in the field of sustainable financing for small-scale agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch3\\u003eTheoretical Framework\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis study adopts Institutional Theory as the lens to examine how Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) influences environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe. Institutional theory posits that actors' behaviour is shaped by formal rules (regulations, policies) and informal norms (social expectations, cultural practices) within a given institutional environment. In the context of PVCF, this theory helps explain how environmental sustainability is either encouraged or neglected based on the regulatory and normative frameworks governing finance and farming practices. For instance, if financial institutions do not embed environmental criteria into loan agreements, farmers may prioritise output over sustainability. Conversely, where environmental conditionalities are enforced, farmers may adopt eco-friendly practices to access finance. The theory also accounts for isomorphism, where smaller actors mimic the practices of more established ones, often reinforcing unsustainable norms. By applying Institutional Theory, the study identifies how the absence of strong environmental institutions and weak enforcement of green financing policies limits PVCF’s capacity to drive sustainable outcomes in the poultry sector.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec3\\\" class=\\\"Section2\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv id=\\\"Sec4\\\" class=\\\"Section3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\n\\n\\n\\n\"},{\"header\":\"Methodology\",\"content\":\"\\u003ch2\\u003eResearch Design and Philosophy\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eA qualitative, interpretivist approach was adopted to gain an in-depth understanding of stakeholders' perceptions and lived experiences regarding Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) and its influence on environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe. This design was chosen for its ability to explore complex, real-world phenomena and uncover nuanced, context-specific insights that cannot be captured through quantitative methods alone (Gillan et al., \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR10\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2014\\u003c/span\\u003e). Grounded in the interpretivist paradigm, the study assumes that reality is socially constructed and subjective, with multiple perspectives shaped by personal, institutional, and environmental contexts (Greiffenhagen \\u0026amp; Sharrock, \\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR11\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2008\\u003c/span\\u003e). This stance allows for a rich exploration of how farmers, institutions, and associations experience and interpret the environmental implications of PVCF. Rather than testing hypotheses, the study sought to generate meaning from participants’ narratives, capturing the diversity of views shaped by socio-economic and regulatory environments. Through this lens, the research reveals how environmental sustainability is conceptualised, practised, or neglected across various nodes of the poultry value chain.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch3\\u003eSampling and Participants\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThis study employed a non-probability purposive sampling technique to select nine participants with direct and relevant experience in the poultry value chain in Zimbabwe. The participants included broiler and layer poultry farmers, public institution representatives responsible for agricultural and environmental regulation, and officials from poultry associations and farmer unions. Purposive sampling was chosen to ensure rich, contextually grounded insights from individuals with first-hand knowledge of poultry production and financing systems. Participants were recruited through site visits, email communication, or outreach via WhatsApp, ensuring accessibility and engagement across different channels.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch3\\u003eData Collection\\u003c/h3\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eData were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with all nine participants, using a flexible interview guide aligned with the study’s objectives and central research question. The interviews explored key themes such as access to VCF, its application, environmental management practices, awareness of sustainability, and the role of institutional support. Interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes and were conducted either face-to-face, telephonically, or electronically via Microsoft Teams or Google Meet, depending on participant preference and availability. All questions were open-ended to allow participants to express their experiences freely and deeply. The interviews were audio-recorded with consent and transcribed verbatim for analysis.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eData Analysis\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e Thematic analysis, guided by Braun and Clarke’s procedures, was used to analyse the interview transcripts. Initial codes were generated and later organised into key themes and sub-themes. The analysis focused on identifying patterns, contrasts, and narratives specific to each stakeholder group. To ensure data quality, triangulation was applied using multiple sources, including interview notes, audio recordings, and field observations.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Results\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eResults Section\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis section presents the qualitative findings on the perceived role of Poultry Value Chain Finance (VCF) in promoting environmental sustainability among various stakeholders in Zimbabwe\\u0026apos;s poultry sector. Insights were derived from semi-structured interviews with farmers, public officials, and union representatives. Two major themes emerged: \\u003cstrong\\u003e(\\u003c/strong\\u003e1) VCF\\u0026rsquo;s Contribution to Long-Lasting and Environmentally Sustainable Farming Practices and (2) Likelihood of Financed Farmers Adopting Better Environmental Practices.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eTheme 1: VCF\\u0026rsquo;s Contribution to Long-Lasting and Environmentally Sustainable Farming Practices\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eStakeholder perceptions of VCF\\u0026rsquo;s role in fostering environmentally sustainable practices were diverse and conditional.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 1.1: VCF as Enabler, but Not Guarantee of Environmental Practices\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eMany respondents viewed finance as a potential enabler for environmentally friendly practices if managed properly. A public sector respondent noted:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;If managed properly it can.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 1)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSimilarly, another participant offered a brief but affirmative view:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Yes.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 2)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThese responses imply general optimism but lack specificity, suggesting that VCF\\u0026rsquo;s environmental impact depends heavily on how it is structured and applied.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 1.2: Profit Orientation vs. Environmental Commitment\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eA recurring concern was that profitability often overshadows environmental considerations in poultry farming. A poultry manager explained:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Investment in poultry farming is highly profitable but risky because of unpredictable conditions which can adversely affect the business. E.g., diseases, outbreaks, and poor weather conditions.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 3)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis underscores the sector\\u0026apos;s vulnerability and the risk that environmental practices may be deprioritized in pursuit of short-term survival and productivity.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eSub-theme 1.3: Gaps in Waste Management and Overuse of Chemicals\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSome participants raised environmental red flags concerning current practices:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Not as such, there is no recycling happening in terms of the disposal of chicken feathers. There is too much chemical use and no proper management of the disposal of the chemical containers.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 4)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis response signals critical issues in waste handling, pointing to missed opportunities for value creation through recycling or safer disposal methods.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 1.4: VCF Focused on Production, Not Pollution Control\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThere was agreement that financing prioritizes output over sustainability. One participant stressed:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Not necessarily, because financing is normally advanced for production purposes rather than for other things such as pollution management.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 5)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis aligns with the concern that VCF, as currently designed, lacks a direct environmental sustainability component.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eTheme 2: Likelihood of Financed Farmers Adopting Better Environmental Practices\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe potential for VCF to stimulate environmentally responsible behaviour among farmers was generally acknowledged but seen as dependent on several factors.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 2.1: Financing as Empowerment\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSome participants argued that access to finance could empower farmers to improve their environmental practices. One participant expressed this view:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Yes, they can use the money to improve their way of operation.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 7)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSimilarly, another participant noted:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Yes.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 8)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis suggests that financial support can indirectly improve sustainability if it is directed toward relevant improvements.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 2.2: Training and Awareness as Critical Enablers\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eOthers stressed that money alone is insufficient. Training and awareness were repeatedly cited as key prerequisites for sustainable change.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;No. It is farmers who have the awareness and the training.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 6)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis view highlights the need for integrated capacity building alongside financing schemes.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 2.3: Barriers, Costs and Knowledge Gaps\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSeveral respondents noted that adoption of environmental practices is often limited by financial and technical constraints:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Yes, but might be limited because these come with more costs and need extra knowledge to be done.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 9)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSub-theme 2.4: Linking Financing to Good Agricultural Practices.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eSome participants believed that sustainable practices could be realized only if financing is linked to structured programs. A union official noted:\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e\\u0026ldquo;Only if the financing is linked to good agricultural practices. With the mushrooming of so many smallholders\\u0026rsquo; farmers, the adoption of environmental practices is very difficult to implement since the farmers have limited income. The farmers do not have much of the environmental practices knowledge as their mind is on production and cutting costs.\\u0026rdquo;\\u003c/em\\u003e (Participant 5)\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis reflects the reality that backyard and smallholder poultry operations dominant in the sector often lack both the financial margins and the technical expertise to invest in sustainable practices unless explicitly incentivized.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe qualitative findings reveal a common understanding that while VCF has the potential to foster environmental sustainability, it is not inherently structured to do so. Financing is largely directed toward productivity, not ecological responsibility. The emphasis placed by stakeholders on training, conditional financing, and awareness-building supports the idea that a more holistic approach is needed one that embeds sustainability requirements in financial mechanisms.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThese insights support SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, which calls for sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. By aligning poultry VCF with this goal through targeted funding for waste recycling, water reuse, and chemical safety the sector could shift from short-term output orientation to long-term ecological resilience.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Discussion of Qualitative Findings\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eThe themes that emerged from this study particularly the enabling role of Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) in promoting or inhibiting environmental sustainability closely align with existing literature on sustainable poultry production and Agri finance. The conditional potential of PVCF to support environmentally sound practices mirrors the observations of Rodrigues et al. (2024), who emphasised that while Environmental Management Accounting (EMA) tools can help link financial flows to ecological outcomes, sustainability cannot be assumed as a natural by-product of financing mechanisms. This supports the participants\\u0026apos; views that PVCF, as currently structured in Zimbabwe, is primarily focused on increasing productivity rather than embedding pollution control, waste management, or chemical safety.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe perception that short-term profitability is prioritized over long-term environmental commitment also echoes concerns raised by (Gržinić et al., 2023), who highlighted that intensive poultry systems exert significant environmental pressures, particularly through the overuse of chemicals and poor disposal practices. The absence of structured recycling or pollution mitigation among the studied farmers reflects broader global challenges in balancing industrial efficiency with environmental stewardship in poultry systems.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eMoreover, the findings revealed a strong consensus that access to finance alone is insufficient to drive sustainable behaviour unless accompanied by training, awareness, and technical capacity. This view aligns with Shamsuddoha et al. (2022), who demonstrated that reverse logistics and green supply chain improvements in poultry production are more effective when integrated with human capital development. Without capacity-building components, PVCF may inadvertently reinforce unsustainable practices by enabling farmers to scale production without corresponding investments in environmental safeguards.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eParticipants also underscored that environmental sustainability in poultry farming is unlikely to be achieved unless financing is explicitly linked to Good Agricultural Practices (GAP). Gabriel and Ifenyinwa (2019) support this assertion, emphasizing that capital investments need strategic environmental conditions to avoid adverse long-term impacts. This further affirms that finance should be conditional and embedded within broader institutional support structures, including regulatory oversight, to ensure effective alignment with environmental goals.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eStakeholder theory offers a useful framework for interpreting these findings. The study involved diverse stakeholder groups: poultry farmers, public officials, and farmer associations each with unique but interdependent interests. The repeated call for training, conditional financing, and support for environmental practices demonstrates the need to balance these stakeholders\\u0026rsquo; expectations. For example, smallholder farmers prioritize cost efficiency and short-term survival, while public officials emphasize adherence to environmental standards. Integrating these perspectives requires participatory financial design and stakeholder-inclusive policy frameworks, as also advocated by (Rodrigues et al., 2024).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eAdditionally, the study found that PVCF fails to incorporate environmental safeguards as core requirements, a concern also noted in Martinelli et al. (2020), who demonstrated that the eco-efficiency of poultry production remains low in systems where environmental indicators are not systematically tracked. The implication is clear: to promote sustainability, PVCF in Zimbabwe must evolve into a mechanism that incentivises or mandates environmentally responsible behaviour, such as sustainable feed practices, chemical safety, and waste valorisation.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe findings also resonate with the call by Shamsuddoha et al. (2022) for reverse logistics and circular economy strategies within poultry value chains. These strategies not only reduce waste but also create new income-generating opportunities, especially when integrated with innovative financing models. Such integrated approaches may help bridge the current gap between production-centric financing and environmental responsibility.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eTo consolidate these findings, a conceptual framework (Figure 1) was developed that illustrates the relationship between the independent variable Poultry Value Chain Finance (PVCF) and the dependent variable Environmental Sustainability. The model integrates critical mediators and moderators derived from the data and literature, including training and awareness, regulatory incentives, sustainability-linked financing conditions, and competing profit-driven goals. These elements serve as either enablers or barriers that mediate and moderate the impact of PVCF on ecological outcomes. This conceptualisation underscores that financial instruments alone are insufficient; their structure, application, and alignment with stakeholder needs and policy contexts determine their sustainability impact. Framed through stakeholder theory, the model highlights that fostering environmental sustainability requires not only financial input but also multi-level stakeholder engagement, institutional coordination, and strategic policy alignment\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eIn conclusion, this study confirms that while PVCF has the potential to advance environmental sustainability, it is currently constrained by a narrow operational focus and lack of stakeholder-responsive design. Framed through stakeholder theory, these findings emphasize the need for PVCF schemes that are inclusive, conditional, and integrated with training, regulation, and environmental accountability. Such a redesign would not only improve ecological outcomes but also ensure that the interests of all relevant stakeholders\\u0026rsquo; farmers, policymakers, financiers, and communities, are equitably considered and served.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch1\\u003eLimitations\\u003c/h1\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThe study\\u0026apos;s scope is limited by its qualitative sample size of nine participants, which, while offering depth, may not represent the broader poultry sector in Zimbabwe. The purposive selection also introduces subjectivity. Additionally, the study focuses solely on perceptions and not on measurable environmental outcomes.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Conclusion and Recommendations, and Future Studies Directions\",\"content\":\"\\u003ch2\\u003eConclusion\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis study explored the role of poultry value chain finance (VCF) in promoting environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe using a qualitative approach. Findings revealed that while VCF holds potential to support environmentally sound practices, this potential remains largely underutilized. Participants identified gaps in awareness, training, and conditional financing as major barriers to environmental progress. The emphasis of VCF on production over sustainability, coupled with minimal institutional enforcement, limits its transformative impact. Although isolated successes were noted, such as waste management and the adoption of renewable energy by some actors, these were not systemic. The study also highlighted discrepancies between different stakeholders\\u0026apos; perceptions, pointing to the need for coordinated, inclusive policy action. Institutional theory helps contextualise these challenges by underscoring the role of formal rules, norms, and capacities in shaping sustainability outcomes. Thus, enhancing institutional frameworks and stakeholder engagement is critical to aligning VCF with environmental goals. Overall, the research contributes to understanding how finance intersects with sustainability in the agri-food sector of developing economies.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eRecommendations:\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eFinancial institutions should embed sustainability criteria in loan agreements.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eGovernment and NGOs should invest in environmental training for poultry farmers.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eContracts should include budget lines specifically for environmental infrastructure (e.g., waste recycling units).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eA coordinated framework linking VCF with Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) is needed to address knowledge and practice gaps.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;Awareness campaigns on the benefits of eco-friendly practices should be scaled up.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eTechnical assistance should be provided to smallholders to overcome knowledge and cost barriers.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eMonitoring and evaluation systems should track the environmental impact of financed activities\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003ch2\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eFuture Research Directions\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eFuture studies could expand the sample size and include more geographical regions to enhance representativeness. Mixed-method approaches combining qualitative and quantitative data may offer deeper insights. Longitudinal studies could track the environmental impact of VCF over time. Comparative studies between countries could illuminate best practices. Lastly, future research should assess the effectiveness of policy and institutional reforms in integrating sustainability into Agri-finance.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"References\",\"content\":\"\\u003col\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eAbah, H., Nwankwo, A., \\u0026amp; Orgem, C. (2019). Waste management practices in selected poultry farms and its effect on the environment and human health in Makurdi, Nigeria. \\u003cem\\u003eInternational Journal of Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 4\\u003c/em\\u003e(1). \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eAkporube, K., Kalu, E., Ikpendu, C., \\u0026amp; Edward, I. (2023). Poultry waste management in Nigeria: a neglected sector. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Sustainable Veterinary \\u0026amp; Allied Sciences\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 4\\u003c/em\\u003e(2). \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eAl-Aomar, R. (2019). Sustainability function deployment: A system-level design-for-sustainability. SysCon 2019 - 13th Annual IEEE International Systems Conference, Proceedings, \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eBoroushaki, M., Ferguson, M., \\u0026amp; Olsen, T. L. (2021). Environmental Sustainability Trade-Offs in a Product\\u0026rsquo;s Supply Chain. In \\u003cem\\u003eSpringer Series in Supply Chain Management\\u003c/em\\u003e (Vol. 10, pp. 189\\u0026ndash;210). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51957-5_9 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eBukachi, S. A., Ngutu, M., Omia, D., Musyoka, M. M., Chemuliti, J., \\u0026amp; Nyamongo, I. K. (2023). Gender-Linked Dynamics and Sustainable Small Holder Poultry Value Chains in Makueni County, Kenya [Article]. \\u003cem\\u003eSustainability (Switzerland)\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 15\\u003c/em\\u003e(14), Article 10907. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410907 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eCentner, T. J. (2010). Discerning liability for contamination by poultry integrators and producers under US federal law [Review]. \\u003cem\\u003eWorld\\u0026apos;s Poultry Science Journal\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 66\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 5\\u0026ndash;16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933910000012 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eChikozho, C. (2010). Applied social research and action priorities for adaptation to climate change and rainfall variability in the rainfed agricultural sector of Zimbabwe [Article]. \\u003cem\\u003ePhysics and Chemistry of the Earth\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 35\\u003c/em\\u003e(13-14), 780\\u0026ndash;790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2010.07.006 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGabriel, E. G., \\u0026amp; Ifenyinwa, M. S. (2019). Capital investment and the sustainability of agricultural value chain of the poultry industry. \\u003cem\\u003eInternational Journal of Management and Entrepreneurship\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 1\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 193\\u0026ndash;216. \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGbotosho, O., \\u0026amp; Burt, P. J. A. (2013). Environmental and health impacts of poultry manure disposal methods: A case study of Lagelu and Egbeda local government areas in Oyo State, Nigeria [Article]. \\u003cem\\u003eInternational Journal of Agricultural Sustainability\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 11\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 38\\u0026ndash;51. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2012.700100 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGillan, C., Palmer, C., \\u0026amp; Bolderston, A. (2014). Qualitative methodologies and analysis. In \\u003cem\\u003eResearch for the Radiation Therapist: From Question to Culture\\u003c/em\\u003e (pp. 127\\u0026ndash;152). \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGreiffenhagen, C., \\u0026amp; Sharrock, W. (2008). Where do the limits of experience lie? Abandoning the dualism of objectivity and subjectivity [Review]. \\u003cem\\u003eHistory of the Human Sciences\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 21\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 70\\u0026ndash;93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695108093954 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGržinić, G., Piotrowicz-Cieślak, A., Klimkowicz-Pawlas, A., G\\u0026oacute;rny, R. L., Ławniczek-Wałczyk, A., Piechowicz, L., Olkowska, E., Potrykus, M., Tankiewicz, M., \\u0026amp; Krupka, M. (2023). Intensive poultry farming: A review of the impact on the environment and human health. \\u003cem\\u003eScience of the Total Environment\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 858\\u003c/em\\u003e, 160014. \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGu\\u0026egrave;ye, E. F. (2003). Information dissemination for family poultry research and development [Review]. \\u003cem\\u003eLivestock Research for Rural Development\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 15\\u003c/em\\u003e(2). \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGundu-Jakarasi, V. N., \\u0026amp; Nhidza, J. (2021). Climate Change in Zimbabwe\\u0026rsquo;s Vulnerable Communities: A Case Study of Supporting Enhanced Climate Action Project (SECA Project) in Bulilima District. In \\u003cem\\u003eSustainable Development Goals Series\\u003c/em\\u003e (Vol. Part F2673, pp. 211\\u0026ndash;223). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70952-5_14 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eJia, L., \\u0026amp; Anthony, E. J. (2009). Combustion of poultry-derived fuel in a CFBC. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Fluidized Bed Combustion, \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMafongoya, P., Gubba, A., Moodley, V., Chapoto, D., Kisten, L., \\u0026amp; Phophi, M. (2019). Climate Change and Rapidly Evolving Pests and Diseases in Southern Africa. In \\u003cem\\u003eNatural Resource Management and Policy\\u003c/em\\u003e (Vol. 53, pp. 41\\u0026ndash;57). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11857-0_4 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMakuvaro, V., Murewi, C. T. F., Dimes, J., \\u0026amp; Chagonda, I. (2018). Are smallholder farmers\\u0026apos; perceptions of climate variability and change supported by climate records? A case study of Lower Gweru in Semiarid Central Zimbabwe [Article]. \\u003cem\\u003eWeather, Climate, and Society\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 10\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 35\\u0026ndash;49. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-16-0029.1 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMartinelli, G., Vogel, E., Decian, M., Farinha, M. J. U. S., Bernardo, L. V. M., Borges, J. A. R., Gimenes, R. M. T., Garcia, R. G., \\u0026amp; Ruviaro, C. F. (2020). Assessing the eco-efficiency of different poultry production systems: An approach using life cycle assessment and economic value added. \\u003cem\\u003eSustainable Production and Consumption\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 24\\u003c/em\\u003e, 181\\u0026ndash;193. \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMelesse, A. (2014). Significance of scavenging chicken production in the rural community of Africa for enhanced food security [Review]. \\u003cem\\u003eWorld\\u0026apos;s Poultry Science Journal\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 70\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 593\\u0026ndash;606. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933914000646 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMitroi, R., Stoian, O., Covaliu, C. I., \\u0026amp; Manea, D. (2021). Pollutants resulting from intensive poultry farming activities and their impact on the environment. E3S Web of Conferences, \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eRodrigues, V. D. V., Wander, A. E., \\u0026amp; da Rosa, F. S. (2023). Diagnosis of the Sustainability of a Poultry Value Chain From the Perspective of Environmental Management Accounting. \\u003cem\\u003eRevista de Gest\\u0026atilde;o - RGSA\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 17\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), e03174. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v17n1-021 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eRodrigues, V. D. V., Wander, A. E., \\u0026amp; da Silva Rosa, F. (2024). Indicators to analyze environmental performance and eco-controls for a poultry production chain: a methodological proposal based on the EMA system. \\u003cem\\u003eEnvironment Systems and Decisions\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 44\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 145\\u0026ndash;160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-023-09918-x \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eScanes, C. G. (2017). Human activity and habitat loss: Destruction, fragmentation, and degradation. In \\u003cem\\u003eAnimals and Human Society\\u003c/em\\u003e (pp. 451\\u0026ndash;482). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805247-1.00026-5 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eScoones, I. (2023). The growth of small and medium-scale poultry production in Zimbabwe. \\u003cem\\u003eZimbabweland\\u003c/em\\u003e. \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eSeidavi, A. R., Zaker-Esteghamati, H., \\u0026amp; Scanes, C. G. (2019). Present and potential impacts of waste from poultry production on the environment [Review]. \\u003cem\\u003eWorld\\u0026apos;s Poultry Science Journal\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 75\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 29\\u0026ndash;42. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933918000922 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eShamsuddoha, M., Quaddus, M. A., \\u0026amp; Woodside, A. G. (2022). Environmental sustainability through designing reverse logistical loops: case research of poultry supply chains using system dynamics. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Business \\u0026amp; Industrial Marketing\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 37\\u003c/em\\u003e(4), 823\\u0026ndash;840. \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eToriro, P. (2024). People-Centred Initiatives as a Response to Infrastructure Collapse in Harare. In \\u003cem\\u003eUrban Book Series\\u003c/em\\u003e (Vol. Part F1829, pp. 181\\u0026ndash;199). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45568-1_10 \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eU. K. Agricultural Finance. (2024). Eco-Friendly Practices in Poultry Farming: The Role of Finance. \\u003cem\\u003eUK Agricultural Finance blog\\u003c/em\\u003e. \\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003c/ol\\u003e\"}],\"fulltextSource\":\"\",\"fullText\":\"\",\"funders\":[],\"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow\":false,\"hasManuscriptDocX\":true,\"hasOptedInToPreprint\":true,\"hasPassedJournalQc\":\"\",\"hasAnyPriority\":true,\"hideJournal\":true,\"highlight\":\"\",\"institution\":\"\",\"isAcceptedByJournal\":false,\"isAuthorSuppliedPdf\":false,\"isDeskRejected\":\"\",\"isHiddenFromSearch\":false,\"isInQc\":false,\"isInWorkflow\":false,\"isPdf\":false,\"isPdfUpToDate\":true,\"isWithdrawnOrRetracted\":false,\"journal\":{\"display\":true,\"email\":\"info@researchsquare.com\",\"identity\":\"researchsquare\",\"isNatureJournal\":false,\"hasQc\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":true,\"externalIdentity\":\"\",\"sideBox\":\"\",\"snPcode\":\"\",\"submissionUrl\":\"/submission\",\"title\":\"Research Square\",\"twitterHandle\":\"researchsquare\",\"acdcEnabled\":true,\"dfaEnabled\":false,\"editorialSystem\":\"\",\"reportingPortfolio\":\"\",\"inReviewEnabled\":false,\"inReviewRevisionsEnabled\":true},\"keywords\":\"Poultry value chain finance, Environmental sustainability, Qualitative research, Zimbabwe, Institutional theory, Sustainable farming\",\"lastPublishedDoi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7311753/v1\",\"lastPublishedDoiUrl\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7311753/v1\",\"license\":{\"name\":\"CC BY 4.0\",\"url\":\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/\"},\"manuscriptAbstract\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eAs environmental concerns grow in agri-food systems, this study investigates how Poultry Value Chain Finance (VCF) supports environmental sustainability in Zimbabwe. It examines stakeholder perceptions of VCF's role in promoting sustainable poultry farming practices. Using a qualitative approach, nine participants- including broiler and layer farmers, representatives from public institutions, and poultry association officials- were purposively selected and interviewed through semi-structured protocols. Thematic analysis identified key patterns and differing views on VCF’s environmental effects. Results show VCF can promote sustainable practices like waste management and renewable energy use, but these benefits depend on funding arrangements, training, and regulatory support. Most stakeholders see VCF as mainly production-focused, with limited emphasis on environmental outcomes unless linked to specific loan conditions or external incentives. The findings have practical and policy implications, emphasising the importance of incorporating environmental criteria and training into poultry financing. This study makes two major contributions: creating a conceptual framework connecting VCF, mediators, moderators, and sustainability results, and expanding the discourse on value chain finance by applying Institutional Theory to address sustainability gaps in the poultry sector.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"manuscriptTitle\":\"Examining the Role of Poultry Value Chain Finance in Advancing Environmental Sustainability in Zimbabwe: A Qualitative Approach\",\"msid\":\"\",\"msnumber\":\"\",\"nonDraftVersions\":[{\"code\":1,\"date\":\"2025-08-08 16:35:10\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7311753/v1\",\"editorialEvents\":[{\"type\":\"communityComments\",\"content\":0}],\"status\":\"published\",\"journal\":{\"display\":true,\"email\":\"info@researchsquare.com\",\"identity\":\"researchsquare\",\"isNatureJournal\":false,\"hasQc\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":true,\"externalIdentity\":\"\",\"sideBox\":\"\",\"snPcode\":\"\",\"submissionUrl\":\"/submission\",\"title\":\"Research Square\",\"twitterHandle\":\"researchsquare\",\"acdcEnabled\":true,\"dfaEnabled\":false,\"editorialSystem\":\"\",\"reportingPortfolio\":\"\",\"inReviewEnabled\":false,\"inReviewRevisionsEnabled\":true}}],\"origin\":\"\",\"ownerIdentity\":\"627f6684-954e-4e3d-978d-c43686139e8f\",\"owner\":[],\"postedDate\":\"August 8th, 2025\",\"published\":true,\"recentEditorialEvents\":[],\"rejectedJournal\":[],\"revision\":\"\",\"amendment\":\"\",\"status\":\"posted\",\"subjectAreas\":[{\"id\":52765243,\"name\":\"Agricultural Economics and Policy\"},{\"id\":52765244,\"name\":\"Environmental Economics\"}],\"tags\":[],\"updatedAt\":\"2025-08-08T16:35:10+00:00\",\"versionOfRecord\":[],\"versionCreatedAt\":\"2025-08-08 16:35:10\",\"video\":\"\",\"vorDoi\":\"\",\"vorDoiUrl\":\"\",\"workflowStages\":[]},\"version\":\"v1\",\"identity\":\"rs-7311753\",\"journalConfig\":\"researchsquare\"},\"__N_SSP\":true},\"page\":\"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]\",\"query\":{\"redirect\":\"/article/rs-7311753\",\"identity\":\"rs-7311753\",\"version\":[\"v1\"]},\"buildId\":\"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd\",\"isFallback\":false,\"isExperimentalCompile\":false,\"dynamicIds\":[84888],\"gssp\":true,\"scriptLoader\":[]}","source_license":"CC-BY-4.0","license_restricted":false}